[hramat]

I am planing to upgrade my K-x to K-r and would like to know your opinion.
Do you find it better, easier to sell the body with or without kit lens (e.g. DA L 18-55)?

I do have set of lenses but all I want to keep. I do not have a kit lens (e.g. 18-55). If it would be worth, I would rather buy the K-r with kit lens and sell the K-x with this lens afterwards.

The price of this lens is quite cheep in the kit with body and would maybe add some value to the K-x body while selling.

[stevbike]

Before you start thinking about selling off your camera, think if it is worth the up-grade or not. I have read of people going up to the K7 or K5 since there is a major upgrade between in the level of camera being bought. I see the K-x and K-r too close for any major increase features.

You could buy the K-r with the kit lens then if you have no need for it, put it on the K-x then sell it. You would have a better chance of selling it to a new person looking at a new to them D-slr.

[Mystic]

I upgraded from kx to kr, while I did not notice any improvement in IQ, but I noticed a quicker AF, AF points illuminated in the viewfinder, more usable LV, and better continous AF, the more pixels in LCD also is a good thing. also a little more solid body, looks more profesional if used black.

I did not regret a moment, that I upgraded to it. there are more features, on kr, like intervalometer, even though it's limited, but it's there.

however I'd say, that high ISO capabilites are worse by 1% this difference is almost invisible, but somehow I feel that kx was a tiny bit better at 1600. however most others would argue with me, that there is no difference in noise qualities and quantities between the two..

well the choice is yours..

I actually felt that price difference between the kr and k5 was too great, while feature wise.. kr isn't that far behind it..

[hramat]

Before you start thinking about selling off your camera, think if it is worth the up-grade or not. I have read of people going up to the K7 or K5 since there is a major upgrade between in the level of camera being bought. I see the K-x and K-r too close for any major increase features.

Yes I have been thinking of this for a half a year now and still questioning. The reason why I want to switch (upgrade) is that K-r shall longer keep its value, while K-x has still a decent value to be sold. Technically I want to switch because of what mention Mystic:

quicker AF, AF points illuminated in the viewfinder, more usable LV, and better continous AF

I have never (really never) used the LV mode, I tried it and found totally unusable. The camera is mostly used by my wife for making pictures of our kids therefore quicker AF is huge improvement. For my wife is also important the focus indicator. She saw it once on some friends camera and from then she always questions.

You could buy the K-r with the kit lens then if you have no need for it, put it on the K-x then sell it. You would have a better chance of selling it to a new person looking at a new to them D-slr.

This was exactly the approach I was considering.

high ISO capabilites are worse by 1% this difference is almost invisible, but somehow I feel that kx was a tiny bit better at 1600

I try to limit the ISO always up to 800, afterwards the noise is noticeable.

price difference between the kr and k5 was too great

K-5 is another league and out of our abilities (and money). Makes no sense to buy it.

[JeremytheIndian]

I have not regretted upgrading to the Kr. I enjoy the illuminated AF points and better LCD the most. AF assist lamp, better live view and more FPS is nice too. OH, and not having to use AA makes the Kr even lighter!

Part of my reason was similar to yours... sell my Kx before the bottom truly falls out with the pricing and get myself a nice, new, warrantied (is that a word?) camera. It's also nice that not much as changed b/c you can jump right into it and not miss a beat; The only thing that I had to get used to was not being able to change your AF mode by hitting the center button... you have to hit info and get to it from there.

I would have really loved to jump straight to the K5 but couldn't get the wife to let me spend that kind of dough... I'm probably not good enough for the K5 yet anyway and I am really liking the Kr.

As far as lenses are concerned all I have in addition to the kit lens is a DA40mm Ltd. and a cheap Sigma 20-300mm. You can save a little by skipping the kit lens on the new Kr but it almost worth it to get and try to sell it or go ahead and buy the Kr and sell that kit lens with the Kx.

Whatever you decide, Good Luck!

[woof]

I have not regretted upgrading to the Kr. I enjoy the illuminated AF points and better LCD the most. AF assist lamp, better live view and more FPS is nice too. OH, and not having to use AA makes the Kr even lighter!

+1 on all these points.

[hramat]

I do not own the kit lens yet, I am only planing to buy K-r with kit lens sell it together with K-x. Anyway, I go for this option.

[yusuf]

Although I don't own k-r, it still seems to have AF issues in low light and no firmware upgrade from Pentax yet to fix that. On the other hand, k-x AF might be 'slower' compared to k-r, but it does not have this problem. I personally would like to have illuminated AF points in viewfinder and better LCD but not till the AF issues are fixed.

[hramat]

I am aware of this issues and this was the biggest concern why not to change. But I am not sure is the same is not on K-x. Mine K-x is also having problem with AF in low light. to be more precise, sometimes I also have feeling that it is not
I would say this is more about feelings of some users.

Front focusing was also mostly reported to be under AWB mode, so if you change to Tungsten white balance it should not appear.

[Taobat]

I have been using a K-r for a few weeks and I can say that it really does NOT have a problem with AF in low light. The problem with the K-r's AF is front focusing in certain artificial light sources: tungsten, some CFLs, perhaps others.

Of course, if you aim at a low contrast target in near darkness with a tiny aperture... you will have trouble focusing. But in general, the AF is consistently fast and while it slows slightly in low light, it is notably faster than my friend's Canon 550D--so much so that she is considering buying a K-r now and giving the 550D to her husband. I have cautioned her about the FF issue.

I did not really see the FF problem unless I went out of my way to test for it until I was shooting in an office under fluorescent lights... for some reason when I shot one part of the room, focus was sharp, but facing the other way showed massive FF-- the targets were 2-3 meters away but the sharpest focus was always somewhere between .5 and 1 meter in front. Very bad.

Manual focusing solved the problem, but was difficult at wide angles, so I was reduced to medium to long zooms. I love everything else about this camera, but this is something that really needs to be fixed.

[BobDoLe]

i like my Kr but i would NOT recommend "upgrading" from a Kx.

the front focus issue is huge if you shoot indoors with artificial lights anywhere near the subject. there's a thread in the Kr section where someone contacted Pentax and eventually got a response from Pentax Japan stating that the issue is a hardware limitation and cannot be fixed with firmware. while Kr owners get the shaft, they continue to release these defective units in wild new colors to unsuspecting consumers.

you can switch to "tungsten" white balance (just remember to switch back to AWB before shooting outdoors) to get accurate autofocus in these conditions. had i known of this issue and that Pentax would do nothing about it, i would have gone for a K5 or a Kx (or overlooked Pentax entirely).

[Taobat]

I have to agree with Bob... had I known how bad the FF could be, I would have gone for the K-x.

Much of the time, I don't see the FF problem, but when I do, it's bad.

If Pentax/Hoya really don't plan to fix it, my first experience with this brand will be my last.

[hramat]

I definitely stick to Pentax, I shoot a lot indoor so for me the tungsten is a high concern but if this could be handled with switching between AWB and tungsten white balance it would be OK.

I was not aware that this was hardware problem, seems strange to me.

If it is hardware how come that they are able to partially fix it with tungsten WB? I also do not understand, why the AWB could not have a software routine which would automatically consider tungsten WB.

[Taobat]

The Tungsten WB "fix" does not work. In the conditions that produce FF, switching from AWB to tungsten makes little or no difference.

[piledon]

...
I try to limit the ISO always up to 800, afterwards the noise is noticeable. ...

Get some software like Adobe Lightroom that lets you clean up and otherwise manage the noise. Otherwise you're missing one of the great features of this camera - its low light capabilities!